I am a professor and endowed professor at the University of Houston where I founded and direct the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture and head the graduate program in space architecture. My background deals extensively with research, planning and design of habitats, structures and other support systems for applications in space and extreme environments on Earth. I have recently written a new book titled "Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax". It can be previewed and ordered at www.climateofcorruption.com. Additional information about my book and views can be found on my YouTube address: http://www.youtube.com/climateofcorruption.

Benghazi Stand Down Denials Don't Stand Up To Reason

President Barack Obama pauses as he makes a statement in response to the attack at the U.S. Consulate in Libya September 12, 2012 at the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, DC. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

There are some large disconnects between Obama administration explanations concerning security and response actions taken before, during and after the disastrous terrorist attacks on our Benghazi consulate and accounts, compared with those which continue to emerge from outside sources. Following numerous White House claims now known to be inaccurate and intentionally misleading, we are repeatedly assured that we will get the real scoop in due time after full investigations are complete. One perplexing issue, among many, revolves around conflicting accounts regarding requests and denials of military aid which might have saved American lives.

Further delays only increase wide-spread suspicions that there are no legitimate answers, and that the president’s strategy is to run out the clock until after his final election is over. If this were not the case, it would seem logical that he would seize upon every opportunity to demonstrate evidence of the leadership and transparency he has repeatedly promised. Meanwhile, those who dare to raise those questions and express such suspicions are often subjected by his supporters to scornful reproach. And yes, I speak from experience on this…a subject I will get to later.

Putting serious questions aside regarding why early requests for enhanced consulate security had been repeatedly denied, along with misplaced blame for the attack on an obscure anti-Muslim video, let’s focus exclusively upon controversies surrounding that fateful seven-hour assault period.

During an October 16 interview, Denver’s WUSA-TV reporter Kyle Clark asked President Obama a two-part question: “Were the Americans under attack at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya denied requests for help during that attack, and is it fair to tell Americans that what happened is under investigation until after the election?” Expressing his regret about the casualties and sympathy for their families, plus a determination to bring the perpetrators to justice, the president didn’t answer either question.

After dodging, Clark asked the first and most important part again: “Were they denied requests for help during the attack?” And once again Obama offered a non-answer, saying: “I can tell you as I have said over the last couple of months since this happened, that the minute I found out this was going on, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.” He continued, “I guarantee you that everybody in the State Department, our military, CIA, you name it, had number-one priority making sure that people were safe. These are our folks. And we’re going to find out exactly what happened.”

So are we to take it from this that President Obama expressly said that in the very beginning he issued a clear directive instructing that all possible means be employed by his National Security Council to secure our personnel? Such a directive would constitute an “Execute Order”, an official mandate that would carry the inviolate authority of our nation’s commander-in-chief. Where is that document?

The New York Times reported that defense department officials said they did not receive a request for help from the State Department as the attack unfolded. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who was with President Obama in the Oval Office for a regular meeting when the first attack reports came in, then later said: “There’s a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking going on here”, adding that “the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place.”

Yet the administration had already put our people in harm’s way…and did so without providing adequate protection. So if the president had issued a formal order to “employ all possible means to secure our personnel”, then wouldn’t the correct decision be to deploy aid to save them? And in not doing so, didn’t the defense secretary countermand the alleged direct order? On the other hand, it wouldn’t seem very likely for that to occur when his military superior, the president, was right there in the Oval Office with him.

According to a Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin, former Navy Seals Ty Woods and Glen Doherty (who were later killed), were ordered to stand down three times following calls during the attack. The first two times occurred soon after they heard initial shots fired, informed higher-ups at the CIA annex, and requested permission to go to the consulate to help out. However, they ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate, which by that time was on fire. The rescue team then returned to the CIA annex about midnight after evacuating those who remained at the consulate and retrieving the body of Sean Smith. They had not succeeded in locating Ambassador Stevens.

Woods and Doherty called again for military support as they began to take on gunfire at the annex. Again, the request was denied. According to those present at the compound, there were no communications problems at the annex, and the team was in constant radio contact with headquarters. Ty Woods was manning a machine gun on the annex roof at the time. He painted a targeting laser on the enemy mortar that later killed him after calling for support from a Spectre gunship that never arrived.

The fighting at the CIA annex lasted for more than four hours. That provided plenty of time for American aircraft and commandos based at our Sigonella Air base in Italy 480 miles away to intervene.

Two separate Special Operations forces were instructed to stand down. Senior military and intelligence sources informed Fox News that a force specializing in counterterrorism rescues which was already in place at Sigonella could have reached Benghazi within less than two hours. The other team had previously operated in Central Europe, and was being moved to Sigonella.

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood denied claims that any requests for support were turned down. She said: “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need: claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.” So if not the CIA…then who did issue the stand down orders?

Larry Womack, writing in the Huffington Post, did a hatchet piece which referred to my earlier October 24 article titled “White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn’t Respond” as a “jumble of lies” and a “rant”. He asserted I had erroneously stated that European military forces that might have rapidly responded did not arrive at Sigonella “until after the attack was over”. However this is directly at odds with reports that at least one counterterrorism force was already in place there ready for immediate deployment.

Womack also challenged my “outlandish claim” that “absurdly” misrepresented drone footage of Benghazi events as “live video” and my assertion “that a series of email alerts received late Tuesday evening provides additional information that was known to Obama administration officials shortly after the attack commenced.”

Well actually…yes! Two surveillance drones had been redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack began, and were already hovering over the compound. One was sent to relieve the first, perhaps due to fuel issues, and both were capable of sending real-time visuals back to Washington. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others could continuously call up that video on their computers.

As for real-time emails, there were lots of them also. According to reports, between 300 and 400 national security figures received these real-time updates throughout the attack. The first one came in about 20 minutes after the fighting began. Another, received just two hours into the raid, advised White House and State Department officials that an Islamic militant group called Ansar al-Sharia had taken credit.

Just to prove that I really can’t be trusted to present accurate information, Mr Womack pointed out that I’m “a climate change denier!” (exclamation emphasis in original). Although I really don’t appreciate the Holocaust implication of that “denier” term, he’s at least correct that I’m a bone fide skeptic on that subject… to the extent this conceivably matters. He also cited a reference to some related statements I have made on that subject which appear in an alarmist blog link. Frankly, I enthusiastically stand by all of them.

Womack concluded his article expressing angry disdain for conservative blogs which he believes callously exploit the Benghazi tragedy for political purposes. Here, he echoes a defense repeatedly voiced by the president. Yet if President Obama is offended that people suspect he hasn’t been forthcoming, there’s a very simple solution. Just provide real evidence to back up his administration’s claims…perhaps starting with that three point order he purportedly issued immediately upon learning of the attack.

Until he does so, this clearly is, and should be, an important political issue. Senator John McCain articulated reasons for this very clearly: “This tragedy, turned into a debacle and massive cover-up or massive incompetence in Libya, is having an impact on the voters because of their view of the commander-in-chief. It is the worst cover-up or incompetence I have ever observed in my life. Somebody the other day said to me, ‘This is as bad as Watergate…[but] nobody died in Watergate.”

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

I just hope that this event gets people to start investigating other questionable actions by this administration (Which are many). In my opinion, Obama has been the worst President we have ever seen. He prays on the uneducated and uninformed for votes and he is doing everything he can do to force our County into a solialistic society. He wants us to have to depend on our government for as much as possible. He is more of a glory hog and campaigner than he is a President and leader. Our country has been beaten up under this administration and I love how they point their fingers at everyone else. Take responsibility for your incompetence or maybe, they are competent, and just have poor agendas for our country. Who knows at this point? “We inherited a financial mess.” Blah blah blah. I can tell you this, the real estate crisis. The fall, started well before President Bush. As someone who was actually in Real Estate, I called this crash over a year before Bush even took office. You can go back to Clinton’s bright ideas of 125% LTV loans and basically helping many people who did not really have the means or credit to purchase houses, qualify for loans they could not pay back. People were moving into homes that were already upside down due to the 125% LTV loans. Than add in the adjustable rate mortgages and it was a bomb just waiting to go off. These were not Bush’s policies, yet he was blamed for the fall. I also love the fact that this administration keeps mentioning the Romney will go back to the policies that put us in this mess in the first place. “Romney will raise txes on small businesses and decrese taxes on the wealthy.” Funny, you never hear that from Romney or anyone in his campaign. Romney actually knows money, finances, and business. He understands what a buget is supposed to look like. He understands cutting expenses where they need to be cut. This BS coming out of the mouths of desperate administraion personel just needs to STOP! It is ridiculous, it is insulting to any truly informed American, and it is an embarrassment to our country as a whole, i.e.’ just like our current foreign policies and weak message we are sending to terroists, etc. What a joke. Get these mornons out of the White House and keep them far away!

A huge problem with the democratic party’s base is that they have a vast element that is poorly educated. They can’t even understand what Obama is doing to destroy them. So what if our unemployment rate doubles… we have Obamaphones now! So what if race relations are the worst that they have been in decades? So what if our spending is unsustainable… give me my food stamps! Ben Zagi? Who is he? Where’s my disability check?

Ok…I’m an Obama supporter and I read this site in order to see the other side’s point of view. I think its fair to say that any reasonable thinking person would agree that the president, secretary of state, leaders in the military or CIA would not hesitate to help Americans who may be under attack. However I must admit that I don’t understand why Susan Rice came out saying what turns out to be totally inaccurate information. My best explanation for this entire tragedy is that poor intelligence led to insufficient security and/or poor judgement by the ambassador and his party to travel to the consulate at that time. Its unfortunate but its impossible to guarantee absolute safety to all of our personal stretched across the globe 100% of the time. If our consulate in China or Russia was under attack would it be wise to immediately send troops into China or Russia ? I think not. A couple of lessons learned from this incident is to increase security at our most vulnerable locations or evacuate those locations during the days leading up to 911. Also the govt must not try to explain situations before more verifiable information is available.

Fox, AP, the WSJ reported that the film maker was Jewish. A few days later terrorist killed an Israeli soldier because they said Jews made the movie.

Note: Photo of proestors in Bengahzi

An Islamist militant group based in Sinai, Egypt, claimed on Sunday a deadly cross-border attack that killed an Israeli soldier in the restive peninsula where jihadi groups have gained a foothold.Three gunmen were also killed in Friday’s attack, which Ansar Bait al-Maqdis (Partisans of Jerusalem) termed as a “Disciplinary Invasion Against those who Dared Against the Beloved Prophet,” SITE Intelligence Group reported. “As the defense of the honor of the Messenger of Allah is one of our duties and responsibilities, your brothers … carried their weapons and became determined to discipline the Jews for their heinous acts,” the U.S.-based monitoring agency said, citing a statement posted on Islamist websites.

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/23/239695.html . Israeli soldier killed because of film http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=286042

Fox, AP

“An Israeli filmmaker based in California went into hiding Tuesday after his movie attacking Islam’s Prophet Muhammad sparked angry assaults by ultra-conservative Muslims on U.S. missions in Egypt and Libya, where a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed.

Speaking by phone from an undisclosed location, writer and director Sam Bacile remained defiant, saying Islam is a cancer and that the 56-year-old intended his film to be a provocative political statement condeming the religion….

Times said it the best. This is not the first time things like this will happen. This story should be apolitical. Terrorists bombed the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in April 1983, leaving 63 dead, including 17 Americans. Six months later, terrorists attacked peacekeeper barracks, killing 241 U.S. Marines and 58 French paratroopers. Then, six weeks before the election, terrorists bombed the U.S. Embassy that had moved to East Beirut, killing 24 people, including two American servicemen.

Asked that morning if the embassy was adequately protected, President Ronald Reagan replied, “Well, these are things that are going to be part of our planning, whatever we can do. But we can’t, on the other hand, crawl in a hole someplace and stop performing.”

1. I believe (I could be wrong; this is just my opinion) that the Right is spending all this time and effort on Benghazi for political reasons; the goal, from the start, has been to politicize this (see Romney’s initial remarks hours after it happened.) I also, equally, believe that the Left is spending all this time and effort to AVOID Benghazi for political reasons; they think that answering any of them will hurt their chances at the polls.

2. Trying to pick at things that should have happened or may have happened but shouldn’t have DURING the fight is not the way to go about successfully attacking Obama’s administration. Focus, instead on the clear reports that Libya cannot be counted on for timely help and support, that Libya is not a safe place to be, and the refusal to send additional US security forces to protect US interests and lives in the Embassy BEFORE this happened.

3. Your earlier piece wasn’t a jumble of lies, but it DID turn into a rant by the end. The most damning evidence was presented in the first half of your post, though. I find it inconceivable why everyone seems to be ignoring that extra security was requested multiple times in the months coming leading up to the Benghazi attacks, and yet never arrived–despite evidence of an increasing threat.

Regardless of who wins the election the truth of Benghazi must be sought. Only one resonable explanation comes to mind for the actions of this administration. The facts would be much more damaging to the president than the obvious lies they stand behind. Was the death of our people seen as an acceptable sacrifice by this administration? Those responsible should be revealed and punished if justified.